Evidence row 565332

What was observed

{
  "count": 1,
  "tools": [
    {
      "description": "Before relying on an MCP capability, answer one question about it: does this exact revision satisfy the requirements your workflow declares? Call it for new work, after a dependency changes, after your own requirements change, or when an integration has already failed and you need to know whether the capability is why (the public triggers are NEW_WORK, DEPENDENCY_CHANGE, REQUIREMENTS_CHANGE, INTEGRATION_FAILURE, OTHER_REAL_WORK). You supply both sides: a capability snapshot you already hold and your workflow requirements. Nothing is fetched and no endpoint is probed, so the answer is reproducible from what you sent and is only ever as good as that snapshot. You get back a verdict with per-check results, coverage, and the limits of the check itself. That is evidence, not an instruction: the caller owns CONTINUE, UPDATE_INTEGRATION, and HOLD, and no verdict maps to any of them. Optional previous (an earlier snapshot and its finished report) adds a revision_receipt comparing that conclusion with this revision. Budget before calling: a Preview grant allows three checks, while POST /v0/snapshot-lint validates argument and requirements shape with no credential and no quota, so start there when unsure. This tool never writes usage-events (usage_event_created is always false) and never discloses the internal Preview bearer; attest your own decision afterwards on a finished owned check.",
      "inputSchema": {
        "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
        "additionalProperties": false,
        "properties": {
          "capability_key": {
            "description": "Opaque caller capability key; same contract as POST /v0/capabilities",
            "maxLength": 128,
            "minLength": 1,
            "type": "string"
          },
          "previous": {
            "additionalProperties": false,
            "description": "Optional. Makes this a revision-aware check (POST /v0/revision-checks semantics). Send the snapshot and finished report from an earlier check of the same capability_key with identical requirements. Exactlane re-evaluates them instead of trusting the report and never looks up earlier calls. Omit for the ordinary check.",
            "properties": {
              "report": {
                "description": "The finished report from the earlier call (structuredContent.report), at most 16 KiB",
                "type": "object"
              },
              "revision_receipt": {
                "description": "Optional revision_receipt from an earlier revision-aware call on previous.report",
                "type": "object"
              },
              "snapshot": {
                "description": "The snapshot that previous.report evaluated",
                "type": "object"
              }
            },
            "required": [
              "snapshot",
              "report"
            ],
            "type": "object"
          },
          "profile_version": {
            "description": "Optional mcp-consumer-fit version; inferred from requirements when omitted",
            "enum": [
              "0.1",
              "0.2",
              "0.3"
            ],
            "type": "string"
          },
          "requirements": {
            "description": "Caller workflow requirements using a supported mcp-consumer-fit schema",
            "type": "object"
          },
          "revision_label": {
            "description": "Optional revision label; defaults to mcp-adapter",
            "maxLength": 128,
            "minLength": 1,
            "type": "string"
          },
          "snapshot": {
            "description": "Caller-provided MCP capability snapshot. No live endpoint is accepted.",
            "type": "object"
          }
        },
        "required": [
          "capability_key",
          "snapshot",
          "requirements"
        ],
        "type": "object"
      },
      "name": "check_mcp_capability"
    }
  ]
}

What the leaf hashes

{"body":"deb1f6d2c7aa79708875a38e91cef02d2fd3af5d4fcd311ab22efed853e6a19c","id":565332,"kind":"mcp.tools","method":"probe.mcp/1","observed_us":1793138131031821,"prev":null,"subject":"9f203123-58bb-4564-a6bf-16e46b22e421","subject_kind":"endpoint"}

Proof

Fold these into the leaf in order, hashing each sorted pair with keccak256, to reach the root of 2026-10-27 (273461 rows).

1. 0x12b9343671487ee60e7c63ba8397c504041be79a78a4a3ceb92e744e7a801710
2. 0x9f8d61fb1b3298006edfb2cd315b8e99cd9e04eb96089452e3bf7c9404ad67aa
3. 0x8ab13e88efb495e8e947e2e1569d1a7277dd4a4000f5d3c3d9dbad0935c16b38
4. 0xeffa2986bac3d7578d4f767f5be0ebe791ff18b801fc92490e773cc34b199ea6
5. 0x38b125df6c69412542fd7a7a0e78eac3d204bb72d7e5631fc444e91ba16d0f66
6. 0x3f718515678637864825fcbb20aff46f9c96117259b415edb023700a0be14f2f
7. 0x081e1f4951d6e73e39dd989771f7ac7c39b4c061db5fbf751eb11c9c7ace3596
8. 0x921711efe29e92dc723b082cb6bc9038e8df7f285f7cc5e0b380e9c8fe5c7795
9. 0x193d4ca77fd18f5603eed9950af686b4fc90040aaa394672f65d04155765608d
10. 0xa09ed7b0630e96460b870ee10d5404bc0c7fafc2746919271d1675bb24fd99c9
11. 0xf3282d08aac8493b8388904acc143add67b80dc96ecc149d4372cab1977d5e98
12. 0x7578555e40efa7fabcea1fc203440565253b358954d398ba44e9e10d228eb3b9
13. 0xedf6ab3c3733ce137d888d3e5f7006ba77ab04b8f1fe576519f7b056959665ee
14. 0x52c5141da0cbee106a30396ee7d1360fd22f55084aca2ca436c8007892775670
15. 0x6913cb48392acb8dc5c940dcdb6e6fc889d544f85dff11da249551a5f027e688
16. 0x518b93854db03dc9fc938883abf30da6eaae5ae0d4336903968fd32a7df8c71b
17. 0x22c1fb9487ee0b9732fa017a0cc321eb27a60c08450d112f755089796e12cb1c
18. 0xa20d48798a34aba12eb9c7297722982d910f06c148f5e27ac59307422964a585
19. 0x9fc354c0ea3efc3f1b6548bb77ea902a50f2c9647647ea61592efce2bd795699

Day root

0xdd77e5e99da32c3f154180d63e3c3e6fe11e896a2c6896412ef6b5c4bcf7e795

Chained

0x23bb4dfd09f55c15ac3962f53578e02c6114d5bfd9bb451cf8794fb6e2817ef4

Published

On Arc Testnet, block 69414147: 0xb2ebd83aafeb765a0ce66e76aefb133ed06606c98038fd56191e2bcd1dcb77b4